"Plundering the Egyptians"

The idea of 'plundering the Egyptians' has gained some traction among Christian thinkers as a way of engaging with mainstream thought. I do not like this metaphor. This page explains why.

Contents:

• Introduction
• Some Reasons Why I Do Not Like The Metaphor 'Plundering the Egyptians'
• The Proper Direction of our Engagement with Non-Christian Thought
• Affirm, Critique, Enrich: ACE

Introduction

"And I will give this people favour in the sight of the Egyptians; and when you go, you shall not go empty, but each woman shall ask of her neighbour, and any woman who lives in her house, for silver and gold jewellery, and for clothing. You shall put them on your sons and on your daughters. So you shall plunder the Egyptians." Exodus 3:20-22

Augustine has used the metaphor of 'plundering the Egyptians' to argue how Christians can engage with non-Christian thought. A number of recent Christian commentators have taken up his idea.

"If those, however, who are called philosophers, have said things with are indeed true and are well accommodated to our faith, they should not be feared, rather, what they have said should be taken from them as from unjust possessors and converted to our use. Just as the Egyptians had not only idols and grave burdens which the people of Israel detested and avoided, so also they had vases and ornaments of gold and silver and clothing which the Israelites took with them secretly when they fled, as if to put them to a better use ... In the same way, all the teachings of the pagans contain not only simulated and superstitious imaginings and grave burdens of unnecessary labour, which each one of us leaving the society of pagans under the leadership of Christ ought to abominate and avoid, but also liberal disciplines more suited to the uses of truth, and some of the most useful precepts concerning morals. Even some truths concerning the worship of one God are discovered among them." Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2.40.60.

What Augustine was saying was that the world's thought, and especially philosophical thought, can be appropriated by Christians to improve Christian philosophy, thought and even perhaps practice. In particular, thought concerning morals and worship.

This idea has been used by Christian thinkers recently to inform Christians how to engage with the world's thought, as an antidote to the tendency over the past hundred years for Christians to avoid and reject and ignore the world's thought.

Some Reasons Why I Do Not Like The Metaphor 'Plundering the Egyptians'

• I dislike how Scripture is used. The whole idea is basing an entire edifice of our approach to secular thought on a single verse. And on a metaphorical application of that verse, at that. Such use of a verse might be useful as a motivation among those who already think this way. But for most Christians, I think it just sets the edifice on shaky foundations. There are better foundations, which I will mention below.

• I do not like the violent imagery. Even though this is only a metaphor, the idea of 'plundering' speaks of undue violence. The idea in Augustine (not in Scripture) is of stealing, which I do not like. Now, I know the argument that it was gold owed as back-payment by the Egyptians to the Israelites for 400 years of unpaid service. And I know it was God showing his power. But I am not sure it is a helpful metaphor.

• I want to image Christ. Personally, I do not believe this is of Christ. Christ came to bring Abraham-promised blessing to the world, not to plunder it. His followers should have a similar attitude, in my view. Blessing rather than violence. See below.

• I don't want to be trapped in a silo. Those who would be happy with this metaphor are a limited and dwindling cohort: those who are happy to build edifices on single verses, and those who like seeing Christianity in military terms, or as spiritual warfare. In the UK, the number of Christians who would like that title are diminishing, and those who would are not so likely to be open to engaging with secular thought. Some evangelicals in the USA are like this, and would be more numerous than here. So the idea might appeal to them. However, they are, I believe, a now-diminishing sector, even though still numerous, especially in influence. I believe many dishonour Christ, in their stance of self- protection of their prosperity. If I am correct, God is leaving them to their own devices, increasingly. (Maybe I am wrong.)

• I want to respect the nation of Egypt. Egypt is predominantly a Muslim nation. What does the phrase "plundering the Egyptians" connote to Muslims? Does it not just bolster the false idea that "Christians are violent and against us"? In these days of recognising the importance of Islam, I believe we need to avoid giving unnecessary offence.

• I want to avoid perils. As Lionel Windsor has argued in The Perils of Plundering the Egyptians, there are also the perils of plundering the Egyptians. The gold taken from Egypt was not only used to resource God's work, it was also used to make the golden calf.

• Appropriation can lead to false beliefs and orientation. The ancient Greek aphorisms are so attractive that they commend themselves pleasingly to our unguarded minds. For example "God helps those who help themselves" might be useful to get a lazy person to act, and "Cleanliness is next door to godliness" might get a child to wash, but neither are found anywhere in the Bible. If we appropriate them to our behaviour, and even more to settle arguments, might we be in danger or subtly and imperceptibly shifting our deeper orientation away from the grace of Christ?

• The Most Important Reservation: I believe it is the wrong direction.

The Proper Direction of our Engagement with Non-Christian Thought

What Augustine was talking about was taking the world's ideas into church or Christian life. Appropriating the world's philosophy in order to build up Christian thought. That is not what we are supposed to be doing! Instead, I believe that Christ's people are meant to help fulfil the Abrahamic Covenant, of

Is not Christ, who came via Abraham, the ultimate fulfilment of that? Did God say "will be saved" or "will be blessed"? Did Christ came only to save, or also to bless? Should not Christ's followers be part of that blessing process?

So I believe Christian thinkers who truly follow Christ should aim, not to appropriate the world's ideas to build up Christian morals, worship or thought, but should aim to bring blessing to the world's thought.

After all, do not non-Christian thinkers operate within the creational framework which God established? So is it not true (as also Augustine acknowledges) that some of their thought is valid, even if some is not?

So, can we not bring blessing to that thought? If humanity has bodies of knowledge in each sphere of science or each discipline, should we not aim to bring blessing to those bodies of knowledge?

Should we not act as salt and light in relation to them?

If so, how can we do this?

Affirm, Critique, Enrich: ACE

I do not believe an essay entitles 'Plundering the Egyptians' would be useful as an argument for engaging with secular thought. I think there is a better way, which I call 'Affirm, Critique, Enrich (ACE)'. It is explained more fully in

• Affirm what is good;
• Critique what is flawed;
• Enrich with our understanding of the richness of Creation.

I find that doing this makes Christian thought more acceptable, in the way Jesus was 'acceptable' in his early ministry of healing. In this way I find I can be salt and light. Often what is good in non-Christian thought is their critique of previous thought, because in that critique they have identified some aspect of creation which previous thought had ignored, while what is flawed is their attempts to postivize that aspect. In more detail:

• Affirm: Affirm what, in non-Christian thought, we believe resonates with Biblical perspectives. It is probably that thought which gives honest insight into the diversity, coherence, meaningfulness and goodness of the Creation. Often these resonances are found in the early stages of a new paradigm, which points out a missing aspect or where extant thought is faulty.

• Critique: Critique what is flawed in non-Christian thought. The way I prefer to do this, is not from some Christian sidelines, firing intellectual ammunition ('transcendent critique', which I find arrogant), but rather try to understand the thought 'from the inside', try to understand what its motivation was rather than how it expresses itself ('immanent critique', which I find to be an expression of humility and gentleness). One way of doing this, is to understand what wrong the thought tries to rectify (my affirmation), and then dig down to expose the presuppositions it rests on, especially those that underlie its flawed attempts at solution, and demonstrate that these presuppositions will prevent it achieving what it hoped for.

• Enrich: Enrich the thought with insights that emanate from a fruitful Biblical appreciation of the richness, the diversity and coherence, the meaningfulness and goodness, of the Creation. I often find it fruitful to suggest an aspect that they have ignored.

Personally, I find the philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd helpful in doing this, but there may be other ways, for example, the Relational Approach. Three examples of how I use Dooyeweerd may be found in Basden 2008.

A danger with ACE: arrogance or triumphalism, thinking we have all true-knowledge. We don't; we share the creation with all, and work together in humanity's mandate to open up its potential. We have Christ, and some have allowed their mindsets to be transformed (Romans 12). But we don't know how far that process has gone, and most Christian thought today might still be far too worldly.

The important thing is that we should not arrogantly try to foist our dogma onto non-Christian thought. Instead, work with humility and gentleness, the fruit of the Spirit, to bring Abrahamic blessing to the world.

References and Other Reading

Shaping Our Disciplines for Christ. The UK Christian Academic Network has a workshop on Shaping Our Disciplines for Christ. Instead of ACE, it poses five questions to help Christian find a way of engaging with mainstream thought.

This page, "http://abxn.org/plunder.egypt.html" is part of Andrew Basden's abxn.org pages - pages that open up discussion and exploration from a Christian ('xn') perspective. Written on the Amiga with Protext, in the style of classic HTML.

Comments, queries welcome. or send message to:

       

In case you cannot read that, it is the letters "xn" (for "Christian") at "kgsvr" followed by ".net" (standing for knowledge server on the net"). Thank you.

Copyright (c) Andrew Basden at all dates below. But you may use this material for almost any non-antagonistic purpose (including commercial) subject to certain easy conditions.

Created: 18 March 2016. Last updated: 27 March 2016 added another problem with appropriation and danger of ACE. 7 November 2024 canon, .end, .nav.